Foolishness of Redshirting Topic

Posted by girt25 on 1/14/2013 4:08:00 PM (view original):You want to make sure a kid will redshirt? Let him know when you're recruiting him. That seems fair and realistic to me.

What would be unrealistic is not to mention it during recruiting and just assume a kid will take it happily because you're not playing him. What actually strikes me as realistic is that a kid might get upset about not playing and want to transfer, that happens in real life all the time -- although WIS is kind here and doesn't make that part of the engine for freshmen unless you've already offered minutes.

I think everyone is missing the point. If a player wants to be mad for not playing then so be it, be mad and leave at the end of the season... Fortunately for me he is not. That being said, what is the harm in a guy taking a redshirt??? That doesnt meen he is stuck there for a fifth year! Players leave all the time good and bad! If we want to speak in realistics, the player should realistically graduate in four years, and he would have the choice of taking that bogus 100k job that someone already mention, or stay in school and play another season.

You just said the player isn't stuck there for a 5th year if you redshirt him...ltm...

all of this real world stuff aside, from a GAME perspective if all you need to do to RS a guy is to sit him out, then it becomes too easy to RS top recruits. Its a game thing. Just like the EE logic was changed to close the loophole of holding back a players scoring to get him to stay - while it is true that a guy who score 3 ppg would not likely leave early, our ability to manipulate that required a fix. Its a game, not an attempt to model real world fully

Posted by metsmax on 1/15/2013 12:57:00 AM (view original):all of this real world stuff aside, from a GAME perspective if all you need to do to RS a guy is to sit him out, then it becomes too easy to RS top recruits. Its a game thing. Just like the EE logic was changed to close the loophole of holding back a players scoring to get him to stay - while it is true that a guy who score 3 ppg would not likely leave early, our ability to manipulate that required a fix. Its a game, not an attempt to model real world fully

Posted by girt25 on 1/14/2013 4:08:00 PM (view original):You want to make sure a kid will redshirt? Let him know when you're recruiting him. That seems fair and realistic to me.

What would be unrealistic is not to mention it during recruiting and just assume a kid will take it happily because you're not playing him. What actually strikes me as realistic is that a kid might get upset about not playing and want to transfer, that happens in real life all the time -- although WIS is kind here and doesn't make that part of the engine for freshmen unless you've already offered minutes.

I think everyone is missing the point. If a player wants to be mad for not playing then so be it, be mad and leave at the end of the season... Fortunately for me he is not. That being said, what is the harm in a guy taking a redshirt??? That doesnt meen he is stuck there for a fifth year! Players leave all the time good and bad! If we want to speak in realistics, the player should realistically graduate in four years, and he would have the choice of taking that bogus 100k job that someone already mention, or stay in school and play another season.

No. we are not missing the point. You realize there is no actual "redshirt" correct? What his rejection means is the player, for whatever reason does not intend to stay in college for 5 years. The game can handle this in two ways.
1) he can "reject" your redshirt proposal as a FR
2) he can leave after his 3rd year of athletic eligibility is up

The game chooses to use option #1 so that you know ahead of time how many seasons you can expect him to play.

Posted by metsmax on 1/15/2013 12:57:00 AM (view original):all of this real world stuff aside, from a GAME perspective if all you need to do to RS a guy is to sit him out, then it becomes too easy to RS top recruits. Its a game thing. Just like the EE logic was changed to close the loophole of holding back a players scoring to get him to stay - while it is true that a guy who score 3 ppg would not likely leave early, our ability to manipulate that required a fix. Its a game, not an attempt to model real world fully

THIS, all this freshman psychology crap (most of it fabricated on the spot to suit one's purposes) is meaningless. THIS is all that matters.

Posted by girt25 on 1/14/2013 4:08:00 PM (view original):You want to make sure a kid will redshirt? Let him know when you're recruiting him. That seems fair and realistic to me.

What would be unrealistic is not to mention it during recruiting and just assume a kid will take it happily because you're not playing him. What actually strikes me as realistic is that a kid might get upset about not playing and want to transfer, that happens in real life all the time -- although WIS is kind here and doesn't make that part of the engine for freshmen unless you've already offered minutes.

I think everyone is missing the point. If a player wants to be mad for not playing then so be it, be mad and leave at the end of the season... Fortunately for me he is not. That being said, what is the harm in a guy taking a redshirt??? That doesnt meen he is stuck there for a fifth year! Players leave all the time good and bad! If we want to speak in realistics, the player should realistically graduate in four years, and he would have the choice of taking that bogus 100k job that someone already mention, or stay in school and play another season.

No. we are not missing the point. You realize there is no actual "redshirt" correct? What his rejection means is the player, for whatever reason does not intend to stay in college for 5 years. The game can handle this in two ways.
1) he can "reject" your redshirt proposal as a FR
2) he can leave after his 3rd year of athletic eligibility is up

The game chooses to use option #1 so that you know ahead of time how many seasons you can expect him to play.

Again, he can leave regardless of a redshirt. What Im simply saying is, if a kid had an option, why wouldnt he take it...What hurt does it do the kid, especially if in the end it helps his draft status. Does it help the coach, SURE.... Lets not get crazy now!

And for those with silly thinking that it would help great teams hoard top recruits, STOP IT! Top guys get them regardless, and as a result in general they have more EE's than everyone else, so it wouldnt be a case of the rich getting richer logic.

When you dont promise a guy anything but a scholarship, and he cant crack your top 10 as a freshman, than a redshirt should ALWAYS be an option. If not, make the recruits smart enough to know, that hey Im two star recruit, however I want to play.... Maybe I shouldnt consider Duke, because my chances of playing there are slim to none....

But that's not what he's saying now is it. He's saying under your system, a team can RS a 5 star, Top 10 player at his position by simply sitting him out for the first year. No one said anything about how this RS system is helping the A+ teams land 5 stars.

Posted by metsmax on 1/15/2013 12:57:00 AM (view original):all of this real world stuff aside, from a GAME perspective if all you need to do to RS a guy is to sit him out, then it becomes too easy to RS top recruits. Its a game thing. Just like the EE logic was changed to close the loophole of holding back a players scoring to get him to stay - while it is true that a guy who score 3 ppg would not likely leave early, our ability to manipulate that required a fix. Its a game, not an attempt to model real world fully

Posted by girt25 on 1/14/2013 4:08:00 PM (view original):You want to make sure a kid will redshirt? Let him know when you're recruiting him. That seems fair and realistic to me.

What would be unrealistic is not to mention it during recruiting and just assume a kid will take it happily because you're not playing him. What actually strikes me as realistic is that a kid might get upset about not playing and want to transfer, that happens in real life all the time -- although WIS is kind here and doesn't make that part of the engine for freshmen unless you've already offered minutes.

I think everyone is missing the point. If a player wants to be mad for not playing then so be it, be mad and leave at the end of the season... Fortunately for me he is not. That being said, what is the harm in a guy taking a redshirt??? That doesnt meen he is stuck there for a fifth year! Players leave all the time good and bad! If we want to speak in realistics, the player should realistically graduate in four years, and he would have the choice of taking that bogus 100k job that someone already mention, or stay in school and play another season.

No. we are not missing the point. You realize there is no actual "redshirt" correct? What his rejection means is the player, for whatever reason does not intend to stay in college for 5 years. The game can handle this in two ways.
1) he can "reject" your redshirt proposal as a FR
2) he can leave after his 3rd year of athletic eligibility is up

The game chooses to use option #1 so that you know ahead of time how many seasons you can expect him to play.

Again, he can leave regardless of a redshirt. What Im simply saying is, if a kid had an option, why wouldnt he take it...What hurt does it do the kid, especially if in the end it helps his draft status. Does it help the coach, SURE.... Lets not get crazy now!

And for those with silly thinking that it would help great teams hoard top recruits, STOP IT! Top guys get them regardless, and as a result in general they have more EE's than everyone else, so it wouldnt be a case of the rich getting richer logic.

When you dont promise a guy anything but a scholarship, and he cant crack your top 10 as a freshman, than a redshirt should ALWAYS be an option. If not, make the recruits smart enough to know, that hey Im two star recruit, however I want to play.... Maybe I shouldnt consider Duke, because my chances of playing there are slim to none....

Trying to emphasize your points with all caps and exclamation points doesn't make them any less wrong. Just sayin.

Posted by girt25 on 1/14/2013 4:08:00 PM (view original):You want to make sure a kid will redshirt? Let him know when you're recruiting him. That seems fair and realistic to me.

What would be unrealistic is not to mention it during recruiting and just assume a kid will take it happily because you're not playing him. What actually strikes me as realistic is that a kid might get upset about not playing and want to transfer, that happens in real life all the time -- although WIS is kind here and doesn't make that part of the engine for freshmen unless you've already offered minutes.

I think everyone is missing the point. If a player wants to be mad for not playing then so be it, be mad and leave at the end of the season... Fortunately for me he is not. That being said, what is the harm in a guy taking a redshirt??? That doesnt meen he is stuck there for a fifth year! Players leave all the time good and bad! If we want to speak in realistics, the player should realistically graduate in four years, and he would have the choice of taking that bogus 100k job that someone already mention, or stay in school and play another season.

No. we are not missing the point. You realize there is no actual "redshirt" correct? What his rejection means is the player, for whatever reason does not intend to stay in college for 5 years. The game can handle this in two ways.
1) he can "reject" your redshirt proposal as a FR
2) he can leave after his 3rd year of athletic eligibility is up

The game chooses to use option #1 so that you know ahead of time how many seasons you can expect him to play.

Again, he can leave regardless of a redshirt. What Im simply saying is, if a kid had an option, why wouldnt he take it...What hurt does it do the kid, especially if in the end it helps his draft status. Does it help the coach, SURE.... Lets not get crazy now!

And for those with silly thinking that it would help great teams hoard top recruits, STOP IT! Top guys get them regardless, and as a result in general they have more EE's than everyone else, so it wouldnt be a case of the rich getting richer logic.

When you dont promise a guy anything but a scholarship, and he cant crack your top 10 as a freshman, than a redshirt should ALWAYS be an option. If not, make the recruits smart enough to know, that hey Im two star recruit, however I want to play.... Maybe I shouldnt consider Duke, because my chances of playing there are slim to none....

Trying to emphasize your points with all caps and exclamation points doesn't make them any less wrong. Just sayin.

No, but saying Just sayin at the end of your statement makes you a teenage girl. Find somewhere else to troll sweetheart, unless you can add something to the discussion.

You can always redshirt a player if he hasn't been redshirted previously... what you seem to want is that you want him to take that redshirt happily (without a significant WE drop) if you sat him his entire FR season without even informing him during recruiting.

I don't think its unrealistic to see where a recruit who wasn't informed he was being redshirted when he signed on, to have an adverse reaction to being redshirted and to prevent people from gaming the system, sitting him the entire season doesn't make any difference whether his WE drops or not.

For all he knows, he's going to get cut next season if you find a better player during recruiting (or maybe sit on the bench again with very little play time) so why in the world would he accept the RS happily (you can force it on him and take the WE hit).

Posted by buddhagamer on 1/15/2013 1:35:00 PM (view original):You can always redshirt a player if he hasn't been redshirted previously... what you seem to want is that you want him to take that redshirt happily (without a significant WE drop) if you sat him his entire FR season without even informing him during recruiting.

I don't think its unrealistic to see where a recruit who wasn't informed he was being redshirted when he signed on, to have an adverse reaction to being redshirted and to prevent people from gaming the system, sitting him the entire season doesn't make any difference whether his WE drops or not.

For all he knows, he's going to get cut next season if you find a better player during recruiting (or maybe sit on the bench again with very little play time) so why in the world would he accept the RS happily (you can force it on him and take the WE hit).

Gamer you make valid points and I understand all of that. But the season is over. I'm fine if a player is mad about not playing, but if your upset, be upset.... What would a RS that does nothing but give the kid a fifth year option, make him mad after the season. I would have no problem letting a kid know my intentions if it wasn't such a drastic response when they don't like it. You can possibly risk losing a recruit, and a lot of schools can't take that risk.

Posted by buddhagamer on 1/15/2013 1:35:00 PM (view original):You can always redshirt a player if he hasn't been redshirted previously... what you seem to want is that you want him to take that redshirt happily (without a significant WE drop) if you sat him his entire FR season without even informing him during recruiting.

I don't think its unrealistic to see where a recruit who wasn't informed he was being redshirted when he signed on, to have an adverse reaction to being redshirted and to prevent people from gaming the system, sitting him the entire season doesn't make any difference whether his WE drops or not.

For all he knows, he's going to get cut next season if you find a better player during recruiting (or maybe sit on the bench again with very little play time) so why in the world would he accept the RS happily (you can force it on him and take the WE hit).

Gamer you make valid points and I understand all of that. But the season is over. I'm fine if a player is mad about not playing, but if your upset, be upset.... What would a RS that does nothing but give the kid a fifth year option, make him mad after the season. I would have no problem letting a kid know my intentions if it wasn't such a drastic response when they don't like it. You can possibly risk losing a recruit, and a lot of schools can't take that risk.

It looks like you just asking to have a loophole to exploit. Here is how I assume you think it should work:

1. A+ school recruits 5 star recruit. Doesn't inform him that he's gonna redshirt during recruiting and wins said recruit.
2. Doesn't play recruit a single minute during the entire season (with no WE drop since he's a FR) and in the last game informs him he's gonna get RS.
3. According to you, you think he should either accept it with no WE drop, or get so ****** off he wants to transfer. I maybe could even accept this if there was no way not to take it back (assuming he says he's going to transfer and there was no way for you to say ok, ok, you stay I was only kidding). Otherwise where is the downside to this? Do you really think 5 star recruits happily accept redshirts after they sat on the bench for an entire season without the coach telling them anything?

Posted by buddhagamer on 1/15/2013 1:35:00 PM (view original):You can always redshirt a player if he hasn't been redshirted previously... what you seem to want is that you want him to take that redshirt happily (without a significant WE drop) if you sat him his entire FR season without even informing him during recruiting.

I don't think its unrealistic to see where a recruit who wasn't informed he was being redshirted when he signed on, to have an adverse reaction to being redshirted and to prevent people from gaming the system, sitting him the entire season doesn't make any difference whether his WE drops or not.

For all he knows, he's going to get cut next season if you find a better player during recruiting (or maybe sit on the bench again with very little play time) so why in the world would he accept the RS happily (you can force it on him and take the WE hit).

Gamer you make valid points and I understand all of that. But the season is over. I'm fine if a player is mad about not playing, but if your upset, be upset.... What would a RS that does nothing but give the kid a fifth year option, make him mad after the season. I would have no problem letting a kid know my intentions if it wasn't such a drastic response when they don't like it. You can possibly risk losing a recruit, and a lot of schools can't take that risk.

It looks like you just asking to have a loophole to exploit. Here is how I assume you think it should work:

1. A+ school recruits 5 star recruit. Doesn't inform him that he's gonna redshirt during recruiting and wins said recruit.
2. Doesn't play recruit a single minute during the entire season (with no WE drop since he's a FR) and in the last game informs him he's gonna get RS.
3. According to you, you think he should either accept it with no WE drop, or get so ****** off he wants to transfer. I maybe could even accept this if there was no way not to take it back (assuming he says he's going to transfer and there was no way for you to say ok, ok, you stay I was only kidding). Otherwise where is the downside to this? Do you really think 5 star recruits happily accept redshirts after they sat on the bench for an entire season without the coach telling them anything?

Actually this is far from my thinking, since I have never had an A+ school, but I see you working. In my opinion, a Five star player should expect to Play, but a 2 star recruit should only expect to play if he is promised such playing time, or at a school which suits his skill set...